User blog:LexsJB/The Evolution of Illustrations
Anyone can copy Georgie Ripper's original illustration style. But not every illustrator will draw an exact replica of her work, as they will add a bit of their own style in it, and sometimes their styles are so madly different, it's hard not to notice. For anyone who has ever clicked on any one of my blogs, you'd probably know that for me, illustrations are the most important thing in a fairy book for me. They have defined my childhood: I used to copy them and I've learnt so many things from them like how to draw certain types of clothing, and hands, and hair. And considering art is one of the things I want to do as a job shows how significant Rainbow Magic has been for me. However, I'm pretty sad but eager to admit illustrations are going downhill. There are many inaccuracies, many recycled images. You can read about them here. It's just getting lazy and nowadays, I know they're gonna be terrible so I only buy certain books with concepts that could be potentially interesting, then I remember that whatever the concept is, it'll still have the same old plot line, so in the end, there's no real reason why I buy the books anymore. I just do. Today (or over a number of days considering I'm writing and making images for this across a long time), I'm going show how the illustrations have changed over the series and what I think about them. I did this by remembering different styles of illustrations in books I own, and I only picked out illustrators who have a distinct style separate to the others, even though they're all intending to draw in the same style. Some illustrating styles are so similar that they might not be the same person, but to save time I'll just treat them as one illustrator. Throughout this very long post I'll post pictures of all the illustrator's illustrations, and you can click on them to see them in good quality (made them in HD size!) And also, I'm only focusing on humans, not much on the goblins or Jack Frost. Just too much effort. Georgie Ripper Time frame of illustrating: Rainbow/Holly - Pet Keeper/Paige (insides), Rainbow/Holly - Sporty/Chrissie (cover) She was the original one, the illustrator whose style is copied by artists for the rest of the series. Respect to her though, I hated it when people tried to copy my drawings. I was absolutely [http://rainbowmagic.wikia.com/wiki/User_blog:LexsJB/Illustrations distraught] when I discovered she no longer illustrated, I mean, I knew there were completely different styles throughout the Pop Star Fairies, but it never really clicked that there could be other illustrators. I thought "she was having an off day and decided to draw in a completely different style in Adele the Singing Coach Fairy to the way she drew in Jessie the Lyrics Fairy." That's really stupid of me and actually quite embarrassing. However, I think she still gets a lot of money from having the underlying copyright for the whole franchise, who still imitates her drawing style: the dot eyes, the smiley faces, the noses. That's all you really need to copy to produce an alike illustration, copy the face and draw the rest in a style of your own (now I'm making references to fictional music groups' songs). Yeah as long as Rainbow Magic carries on, she'll live comfortably probably. Luckily, I stopped reading the books when she left the series altogether (stopped drawing the covers) (but obviously came back to it later). Anyway, her illustrations have: *detailed shading on Kirsty's hair *circular faced *little use of eyebrows to convey emotion *'c' shaped mouths when showing bad emotions *upturned (?) noses, you never really see them in recent fairies. For adult noses, the bridge of the nose is drawn and can be quite large *simple clothing, like a plain dress or normal trousers and ballet pumps. *swirly handwriting *probably been drawn with an ink pen Illustrator 2 Time frame of illustrating: around Flora If I'm not mistaken this should be one of the first illustrators to take on the job of replicating the original illustrations. I think they did a good job of it, but some of their own style has slipped through: *like Lindsay's nose, which is completely straight and angular, unlike Georgie Ripper's noses which are more curved. *mouths are a little far down their faces *eyes are perfect dots, but quite far apart *Kirsty's hair has shading, Rachel's hair is proper Because Flora is a much bigger book than the rest of the specials, Illustrator 2 probably got bored of it already and dropped out, because I'm not sure if we see any more of their style in the rest of the books, but... How well I think they did: pretty well, kept the original style well but their own style is noticeable Illustrator 3 Time frame of illustrating: around the Petal and Dance Fairies This illustrator is quite funny, their style is very very noticeable. In fact, you can tell they're finding it hard to replicate the original as they add in eyebrows for neutral expressions (bottom middle picture of two ladies), something they'd probably do when drawing in their own style. *Kirsty's hair has detailed shading, Rachel's hair has a solid shape *characters can be drawn in funny animated positions *facial expressions are also included like that one of Kirsty in the middle where she has a "I dunno" face *defined shape of legs, sorry if that sounds creepy *sometimes eyes appear too small How well I think they did: alright, it's very different and their own style is very noticeable, it gives the illustrations a comic, cartoony look. Illustrator 4 Time frame of illustrating: around Chrissie I don't really have much to say about this illustrator because I only found one book where they illustrate, and it's pretty close to the original. *prominent cheeks *Kirsty's hair has shading, Rachel has proper hair *adult noses are a little too large, but reminiscent of original style *mouths look very happy, very arched How well I think they did: pretty good, the style is reminiscent of the original and their own style isn't exactly noticeable at first Illustrator 5 Time frame of illustrating: around Gabriella and Destiny/Music Fairies I actually really like this illustrator. I'm not just saying it because they drew The Angels, but it's detailed on the people and the background. *some use of eyebrows when necessary *really detailed background, you can see shading on stuff and writing on things you wouldn't notice, for example this bus. *Kirsty's hair doesn't have much shading, Rachel has proper hair, even when in a ponytail *very happy curved mouths *long oval eyes How well I think they did: alright, it's very different and their own style is very noticeable, it gives the illustrations a comic, cartoony look. Illustrator 6 Time frame of illustrating: around Ocean - Magical Crafts Fairies (drew half of the Helping Fairies, can't remember about any others later) This illustrator has been going a long long time and that's a good thing because they're really good, I've expressed my like for them before, in the Rainbow Rants blog where I compared their drawing of a crowd with a drawing of another illustrator (who will appear here later on). *really detailed backgrounds, even on people. A picture of a queue that will appear later on, it's really impressive how they managed to draw items of outfit, detail on hair, for every single irrelevant person, it's actually so beautiful *curly hair resembles the bushes in the background *detailed hand shape, in fact this is how I learnt to improve drawing hands. You see their palms of their hands a lot and use hands in general a lot, sometimes for no reason, like the picture next to the picture of Dakota May. I'm guessing they're counting to 3? I can't remember. *ankles are drawn *Kirsty's hair has no shading, but only on one occasion, Rachel's hair is beginning to transform into a few strands but usually joins up to form a solid shape *usually stand with one arm out *smaller smiles, as seen in picture of Kirsty in the picture next to Dakota May *probably drawn with pen then gone over on computer However, Illustrator 6 isn't always perfect, I called them out for reusing pictures of The Angels on the ranting blog, as well as not being bothered to create a new design for a character who actually has a speaking part, but I'm happy to dismiss that. For now. How well I think they did: it's a cartoony but illustrative look, and only slightly reminiscent to the original style. The lines are perfect, none overlap, but this is the beginning of Rachel's infamous few-strand ponytail Illustrator 7 Time frame of illustrating: Adele, Miley, Rochelle This illustrator is surprisingly detailed. It doesn't really look much like the original style, but it's something different (in a good way). *shading on everything, the items of clothing, even to establish skin tones (like with Lila) *block legs, aren't so realistic and don't really have much shape to them, and are very very thin! Poor Kirsty *small circle dot eyes *Kirsty's hair doesn't have much shading, Rachel has proper hair, even in a ponytail *Priya and Yvette's hair seems to be really big for their head, not sure what happened, but still *probably drawn with inky pen How well I think they did: it's very different, I quite like it and emotion is shown without using eyebrows but strays from the original style, as it is quite graphical Illustrator 8 Time frame of illustrating: around Selena I thought this illustrator was a little strange, they have a really really cartoony style, as if you'd find it on an animated TV show somewhere. *hands are usually drawn funnily (see boy on the left picture's left hand, most hands throughout books are drawn like that *faces are round, sometimes too big for body *nice detail in some parts *Kirsty's hair doesn't have much shading, Rachel has a proper ponytail OK, now I'm looking back at this typing and the picture on top right corner does not belong to rest of styles. Because Rachel doesn't have proper hair. How well I think they did: it's a weird style suitable for young kids, but not so bad. Strays from the original quite a lot. Illustrator 9 Time frame of illustrating: around Fairytale Fairies/ Daisy onwards In my opinion this is the WORST illustrator out of them all. Not because they can't draw, no, they can draw fine, but because: 1. They reuse their illustrations 2. There are so many inaccuracies, where the picture doesn't make sense with the text I have a special section dedicated to this illustrator in my Rainbow Rants blog (example 4, a whole section). Here's why I really dislike them: *girls stand in the same position, legs slightly apart, arms out, with one eyebrow raised *sometimes when their position changes, you can see the illustrator has edited the arms or legs a bit but kept the whole body, which can be seen because the detail on the clothes is exactly the same (same folds in material, same shading lines) *choice of shoes usually seems to be big sandals with large straps *'the single eyebrow raised in every single picture', I understand it might be their way of expressing an emotion, but that single picture in the Georgie Ripper picture of Rachel, bottom left side, shows so much emotion for some reason, with no eyebrows whatsoever. These eyebrows give the girls (when combined with a smiley mouth) a constant look of worry or as if they're trying not to cringe in an awkward situation. It really gets to me. *accuracy is terrible. In Daisy the Festival Fairy, Kirsty is drawn with leg warmers, when Rachel is the one being described wearing them. Also, Mr and Mrs Tate are drawn for the first chapter, when it's Mr and Mrs Walker who appear in the book only. *Kirsty's hair is always down, Rachel's hair is always up (with a few squiggles indicting a ponytail) *definitely been drawn on the computer, which isn't bad, but allows the person to copy and paste images and edit them a bit, and trace over previous ones, which I'll get to later. *in the two images on the bottom right from Alyssa the Snow Queen Fairy, you can see the person has reused the image because: 1, the shading and lines on Rachel's skirt are exactly the same; 2, the girls' boots are exactly the same; 3, Kirsty's hand has just been edited to hold Buttons' lead as their arm position is the same; 4, the girls' hats and Rachel's hair is exactly the same. Other people might really like this illustrator and I can see why, they're consistent and somewhat detailed but for me I detest them due to the constant reuse - I just see it as lazy. Sometimes they have some good days, like when they illustrated Elsa the Mistletoe Fairy which is only slightly better, and I obviously don't understand what it's like drawing pictures for hundreds of fairy books with the same two girls and in a deadline too, but it kind of annoys me. Happily, I'm seeing this style less and less, but I'm sure they'll return one day. These are some images from the ranting blog that would fit here too. Rrblog8.jpeg|from an old blog Rrblog6.jpeg|illustrator 6 vs illustrator 9 Rrblog5.jpeg|so much recycling How well I think they did: terrible. Sorry Illustrator 10 Time frame of illustrating: Most books that came out in USA first This illustrator only does stuff for the US exclusive books, so they're Scholastic's own illustrator. Most notably, they use different skin tones. In America, there's a higher proportion of African Americans than people in UK (in uk obviously they're not American so we can't say they're African American and what we do call them can offend Americans so it's complicated, I'll try to avoid saying anything potentially offensive for the American audience). Actually, while I'm here, I'd like to quickly talk about race in RM. Caucasian fairies and 'African American' fairies are common, they both get their fair share which is good, especially in this delicate decade we live in where anything can be seen as offensive. In fact, I saw this on a comment somewhere, every single US special after Autumn the Falling Leaves Fairy is African American. Like, every single one, even the extra Fairytale Fairies (except Rita but she's quite tanned even then). Why that is I'm not sure, maybe because the American publishers don't want to offend their audience so need to add in as many African American fairies as possible. I'm not complaining, it's just a bit suspicious. But I'm not seeing many Asian fairies. Sure, we had Mae the Panda Fairy (who is definitely Chinese because I'm Chinese and I just know it) and Fatima the Face Painting Fairy (whose name, skin tone and elegant style of clothing I interpret as Middle Eastern-South Asian, don't know about you). You could interpret fairies like Rae and Katie who have black hair to be East Asian but it's not as explicit as Mae. What I'm saying is that we should have other cultures in RM because as both UK and US become more multi cultural whether you like it or not, everyone should have at least one fairy who looks like them. *skin tones *The girls' hair is more frequently in plaits than in the UK versions *And I'm not sure if the cover illustrator is the same as the insides illustrator but the fairies' eyes are so big. I know Angela Jun designs the covers but I don't think she draws them. Whoever it is, they draw their eyes way too big. *probably drawn in pen and gone over on the computer How well I think they did: it's very different, and to me, looks American. Don't know why, it just looks like an American school picture book. Probably just me but has that feeling where something is so American but you don't know why. Maybe it's the plaited ponytails. Illustrator 11 Time frame of illustrating: around Becky, Samira This one is very strange, something's off about it and I don't know what. Sometimes legs are in weird positions and proportions look off. That picture of Samira, you look quite uncomfortable there, maybe if you were putting something down, you should bend your back a bit. I know you're a superhero and all but you don't have to hold that grand confident stature for the whole time. Very weird. I think it's the skirts, as they stick out weirdly. *yeah, something looks off *sometimes lines don't join up, and lines overlap, so quite messy *small faces (small eyes, small nose, small mouth. Just small in general.) *Kirsty's hair has little shading, Rachel's hair is a mess How well I think they did: drawing is good enough to convey a message I guess. Not so reminiscent to original style, and illustrator's own style is there alright, apart from the faces, which you can tell puts off the illustrator as they don't seem to flow with the rest. Illustrator 12 Time frame of illustrating: Frances, Charlotte (the 2nd one), other later books I actually really like this illustrator, in fact I admire them because they're so detailed. I think they're really similar to Illustrator 5, and I actually thought this was them and they made a comeback, but now I don't think so. The lines are thinner and everything's a little more detailed. *Kirsty's hair has no shading, Rachel has proper hair *detailed backgrounds and scenery *no previous illustrations used (I'll get onto that later) *big eyes, sometimes black silhouette is used to draw attention to the wrong things, like Rachel's leggings for example How well I think they did: really well, more reminiscent of Illustrator 5 than the original Points I'd like to point out Typography The presentation of text in RM has changed a lot over years. On the right side of the pictures you will see wording from earlier books, on the right, you will see wording from later books. I expect you all can see the huge difference, that the new wording is done with computer fonts. I actually like it at some points, like the font on that computer is justified as it is on a computer. The flyer for the Rainbow Days Festival is good, but maybe Times New Roman wasn't the best choice for a fun festival flyer. The Mother's Day leaflet is quite nice too, and the handwritten font for the Cornish Pasties (that drawing of pasties is really quite attractive too...) but I'm not such a fan of the computer processed Tippington Town sign. We can all admit that the scroll with swirly writing saying the town name is more magical and fairytale like than a word processed sign. Even the Tippington Manor sign from the Jewel Fairies is hand drawn with a swirly 'W' you probably wouldn't see on any official British building's welcome sign. But anyway. Reusing imagery This is popular amongst most of the illustrators, not just Illustrator 9. Sometimes an annoying thing I notice is when previous fairies make cameos in another book, the illustrator takes their cover image, traces over it, and there. It's done. It's lazy. I hate it, and I highly respect illustrations that have previous fairies in them which have been drawn from scratch. The illustrator has bothered to look up the fairy, draw her in a new position that suits the surroundings with the same clothes and all. For example, the big picture here shows illustrations of fairies who either have cameos in other books or in their own book where the illustrator has take the cover image for laziness. It is really quite disappointing, especially all the Music Fairies at the bottom there. Even the picture of Danni has been mirrored in the two illustrations. In comparison, look at this illustration of Jennifer, Georgie, Alexandra and Kate (in Charlotte). It is so beautiful I actually coloured it in and put it on my user page. The illustrator (12) has actually looked up what the fairies are wearing and drew them in completely new positions and it really works, I love it! Sometimes, the illustrator will use the cover drawing of a fairy in their own book. Most popular in the recent books, the fairy's first appearance will usually be an illustration of her on the front cover, but with a few added sparkles around it and maybe the direction she's looking in is changed. This picture of Belle first appearing is really good, the illustrator's put her size into perspective with the leaves, and drawn sparkly detail, and drawn the fairy from scratch. Occasionally throughout the book, the fairy's positioning will be reminiscent of the front cover. For example, Samira the Superhero Fairy's plait will flow out behind her, even if she's just standing still. If a fairy who has one leg bent in the front cover, she will be seen across the duration of the book with one leg bent. It's just something I noticed, not sure about anyone else. Kirsty and Rachel's hair Some illustrators will colour in Kirsty's hair completely and some will give it some shading. I don't mind either, but I really respect the illustrator (probably 6) who shaded Kirsty's hair with a few grey lines, probably the only time this has happened was Perrie the Paramedic Fairy. It adds detail. All in all, I don't mind any style of Kirsty's hair. However, nowadays it's usually drawn down, she never seems to tie her hair up anymore, but Rachel on the other hand... Rachel's hair is a mess nowadays. Literally, a mess. Look at this picture (in the car) with Illustrator 11 and you will see Rachel's ponytail consists of 5 strands, all of which don't join to the hairband and don't even join up to form a solid shape. In the times when Rachel's hair was left down, you can see line detail on her hair, and it's just so nice. Even her fringe. I admit my attempt at Rachel's hair was pretty bad itself, but for me, I'd rather give her what looks like a proper ponytail than a nice fringe. Some mockery I'm now going to criticise certain images I came across that I have quite a bit to say about. Feel free to skip if you're not up to negativity, I won't mind. I like to ramble and rant. *All these pictures: 1. The goblins have strangely big heads. And I know some of them are scrawny but not that scrawny. 2. Kirsty's hair is unaffected by the gravity when she and Rachel are being whisked along by a big gust of wind. 3. Why is Taylor half smiling, half upset? If a character is shocked or angry, their mouths should be a 'c' shape, not the smiling face. 4. Why is Meghan smiling when she says they only have half an hour? 5. ... Me-2-U No one owns the Fabulous Fairy Annual 2016. Only people in UK own it (Australia too? I don't know: let me know, Ouran After High?) and a very small amount of people too, considering they've now been discontinued. And if you don't own this annual, be glad you don't. In fairy annuals, they have one extra story to make it worth buying, you're not missing much if you don't own them, but it's just nice to have something new in an annual. Be glad you won't be exposed to this atrocity I came across in the one-off story. This is Me-2-U, Rachel and Kirsty's favourite boyband, ever. For some reason, I made them a page which I'm considering deleting as they don't even say anything much, and they only appear in the annual. The illustrator who did this is cruel. The third boy looks alright, the first boy looks OK too because his legs are covered by smoke, but the second and last boy. I separated them from the rest of the picture and it is horrifying, so horrifying that I had a go at trying to improve this poor boy's proportions. Let me know if you think I made a good improvement. I understand they're trying to fit tons into one illustration: the boys dancing, the girls cheering, the stage set, but it's just not right. I don't think any of the above illustrators are responsible for this. And one other thing I have to say about Me-2-U, when Jack hacks their performance ("Me-2-U's voices had changed. Their singing had turned into screeching"), I think we can all say based on today's pop culture that Jack didn't crash the concert, he just turned off the autotune mid-performance. Dancing This funny comparison of Kirsty twirling in Nina, and Rachel doing a "little skip" in Martha. Funny little skip you're doing there, Rachel. More like an Irish jig. Sorry. Background fairies Another interesting comparison is this scene from Meghan and these scenes from Tilly. On the left side, there are just random fairies in the crowd, some don't even have proper items of clothing drawn. But on the other side, there are random fairies AS WELL as some fairies we recognise. It's a warm feeling, seeing familiar fairies in a crowd. Mrs Tate over years It's fun to see how Mrs Tate evolved. She began with her glasses further down her nose, where she looks down into them, as seen in Georgie Ripper's picture and her eyes are hardly in the lenses. From then on she just goes a bit funny. Which Mrs Tate do you prefer? Kate the Royal Wedding Fairy In the newest appearance of Kate in Meghan's story, something looks off about this picture... Maybe it's because she's looking left and her veil has not changed position, almost as if it's only her face that's moved and not her head and hair? Yeah probably. how did that happen? And some images I'd like to praise These ones I really like and appreciate the hard work that went into it so I think we should give them more attention. Blog parents.jpg|1 Blog mountains.jpg|2 GrooveGangandAngels.jpeg|3 Blog chrissie.jpg|4 Blog girls.jpg|5 Blog marathon.jpg|6 1. The perspectives of the parents walking away with their backs to us. Really impressive, illustrator 6. 2. Illustrator 12's Scottish highland cottage. The mountains are actually quite beautiful and the detail of the thatched roofs. 3. Groove Gang. Not just because they're Groove Gang, but because the characters can be seen and are presented neatly, and the cafe detail in the background too. 4. Illustrator 12, again. When Chrissie and Gabriella arrive to pick up the girls, the illustrator has redrawn the fairies by scratch, and added so much detail onto the window, the frame and added snow for sizing the fairies, and even magical swirly things. This is one of my favourite illustrations from 12. I'd even colour it in if I had time. Well done. 5. Illustrator 12 once more. The girls walking in Rainspell Island (in one of the friendship fairies), with the boat in the background is lovely. 6. This half marathon in Perrie. You can see so much emotion in the whole scene, the struggling 34 dude, the eager 112 woman, the determined but tired 57 man, the leisurely 68 guy, the out of breath 8 girl, and Mr Walker. Such a good picture from Illustrator 6. Rating My Top 3: 1. Illustrator 5 (for the nostalgia really) 2. Illustrator 12 (although making rare appearances, such a detailed style) 3. Illustrator 6 (I'm quite used to this illustrator, as I own lots of books done by them, and I love their queues and crowds) My Bottom 3: 1. Illustrator 9 2. Whoever illustrated Me-2-U 3. Illustrator 11 (I'd like to remind everyone this person did Tiana the Toy Fairy 2, a book I did a review on and had a special slideshow dedicated to some illustrations. Check it out.) Who are your favourites and un-favourites? Final words Phew, that's done! I spent so long on this, even more than the Evolution of Rainbow Magic. I hope you enjoyed it if you read it. Let's bear in mind that we don't know what illustrators have to go through. I've spoken to a couple of the people involved with RM art, and they say they don't get much say in what they're told to draw. They probably have to do it in a deadline too, and that's why it's a shortcut to copy and reuse imagery. But some of these things cannot be forgiven (me2u, illustrator 9). Even though RM illustrations don't influence me nowadays, I'll always hold a candle to the ones that did. I'm not really implying I know I can do better, as I don't understand the conditions they work under. We all criticise things like movies and adverts and all kinds of media but we know, inside, we wouldn't be able to do better (unless you're certain of how they could improve it (like I demonstrated with me2u)). Since I've summed up everything I hate and love about these illustrations, this will hopefully be the last you see of me ranting about them. I've done it, I got it out of the way, and you no longer have to hear me say anything new about them. I'm going to leave you with a tutorial I imagine RM illustrators are told to follow. I encourage you to pick up a pen, get a piece of paper and follow it, I'm sure you'll manage to create something that looks like as proper illustrations! Good luck and thank you! LexsJBTalk 11:13, April 29, 2018 (UTC) and if i'm being honest, i only wrote this for my own enjoyment as i know no one else really cares Category:Blog posts